The Absurd Theory of Fossil Fuel Formation

[StarMan]

It doesn't take much reflection on the common explanation of formation of fossil fuels, from coal, to crude oil, to natural gas, to find that it doesn't make any sense at all.

In fact, it's anti-science.

1.  Where in the world is fossil fuel formation currently underway today?  Answer:  nowhere.

2.  Why didn't microorganisms break down the plant and animal matter that supposedly was compressed to form coal, and crude oil, and natural gas?  They were around then.

3.  How could such a profound volume of organic matter accumulate in so many different locations around the world, such that they are now under thousands of feet of ocean, and soil, and rock?

4. How elegant that rock formations contained natural gas, and crude oil under very high pressure, for such long periods of time?  Gas station underground tanks leak with extreme regularity.  But oilfields have been producing enormous quantities of crude oil for many decades.

5.  The elegance of atomic structure and chemical reactions and their reversibility and efficiency, the vast interconnectedness of virtually all things, the beauty of our senses and our discoveries and our lives and  loves, the tutorial method by which humans have acquired knowledge for thousands of years, all of these and many more factors besides didn't just assert themselves, from the fluctuation of a quantum vacuum.  Sorry.

Ponder these and other questions every time you fill your automobile gas tank  with gasoline, and you watch tens of thousands of other vehicles plying the roadways worldwide, and the airspace, overhead, and the oceans, rivers and lakes around the world, as they have done for over 100 years now.  That is one heck of a lot of  fossil fuel.

 

I posed these issues to a geologist specializing in oilfield work, who lives in Canada.  He agreed with me and stated that there is considerable debate over how all this stuff was actually formed.

We really don't have a clue.  But here is one scientific fact:  We really don't HAVE to have "a theory," particularly when it doesn't hold water.  It is sufficient to simply say, "We don't know," and let it go at that.  Darwinists have yet to learn this.  They HAVE to have something to cling to, no matter how useless it might be.

[StringJunky]

Say"Hi" to God for me.

[Strange]

2 hours ago, StarMan said:

1.  Where in the world is fossil fuel formation currently underway today?  Answer:  nowhere

It is happening in all sorts of places. Do you have any support for your claim it isn't?

2 hours ago, StarMan said:

2.  Why didn't microorganisms break down the plant and animal matter that supposedly was compressed to form coal, and crude oil, and natural gas? 

They did. That is an essential part of the process. It seems you don't actually know what you are arguing against.

2 hours ago, StarMan said:

3.  How could such a profound volume of organic matter accumulate in so many different locations around the world, such that they are now under thousands of feet of ocean, and soil, and rock?

IT happened over millions of years. Why not do some calculations on the amount of biomass that grows each year and how much fuels this would create. Just relying on your incredulity is not very convincing.

2 hours ago, StarMan said:

4. How elegant that rock formations contained natural gas, and crude oil under very high pressure, for such long periods of time?  Gas station underground tanks leak with extreme regularity.  But oilfields have been producing enormous quantities of crude oil for many decades.

And a lot of it has leaked. Giving humans easy access to it for millennia. Again this seems an argument based purely on your incredulity.

2 hours ago, StarMan said:

5.  The elegance of atomic structure and chemical reactions and their reversibility and efficiency, the vast interconnectedness of virtually all things, the beauty of our senses and our discoveries and our lives and  loves, the tutorial method by which humans have acquired knowledge for thousands of years, all of these and many more factors besides didn't just assert themselves, from the fluctuation of a quantum vacuum. 

I don't know what this has to do with the subject. 

So you have no evidence against the formation of fossil fuels. Just your incredulity and ignorance. Forgive me if I don't find that very compelling.

2 hours ago, StarMan said:

We really don't have a clue.  But here is one scientific fact:  We really don't HAVE to have "a theory," particularly when it doesn't hold water.  It is sufficient to simply say, "We don't know," and let it go at that. Darwinists have yet to learn this.  They HAVE to have something to cling to, no matter how useless it might be.

One of the great things about science is that it does very often say "we don't know". This includes people who study evolution. There is a great deal we don't know about evolution (as in every branch of science). But the underlying theory is so well supported by (literal) mountains of evidence that there is very little doubt about it.

(It is others, such as religious nutters, who refuse to say they don't know. I guess you might be one of them as you use illogical arguments and think that "Darwinist" is a thing.)

 

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

This is a science site, not your blog. If you you want to preach without actually citing any sources to back you up, go do it elsewhere.